LETTERS; Bush and Iran: A New Landscape

Published: December 6, 2007

The National Intelligence Estimate has established that Iran halted its weapons program four years ago, and President Bush has been misleading us on Iran. I am appalled, once again.

How can we, the American people, allow the Bush administration to continue to ''massage'' its own intelligence assessment on Iran's extinct nuclear weapons program to prove that Iran must be pressured to suspend its weapons program? Excuse me?

I agree with President Bush that it is a warning signal, but the warning is that the last thing we, the American people, need is to be misled into another disastrous war based on blatant lies, overblown rhetoric, reckless hype and trumped-up intelligence. Congress must intervene quickly; we have lost too many men and women to the war machine. Nancy DePas

Flushing, Queens, Dec. 4, 2007

To the Editor:

It should come as no shock to anyone who has actively followed the Iraq war that President Bush has chosen to mislead the American public about the status of Iran's nuclear weapons program. I have followed this war especially closely as my husband has served in Iraq twice, my friend's son has served twice, and my other friend's son died there.

President Bush has consistently demonstrated that he believes that belligerent words and actions make America safer, despite the now highly successful terrorist recruiting station known as Iraq. I am begging Congress, on behalf of my husband and our entire military, please do not let President Bush further abuse our fighting men and women. Condemn him for his brazen falsehood, and refuse to let our brave military be used against Iran. Wendy Chambers

Your article about Iran's supposed abandonment of its nuclear arms program asked if the latest revelations will raise questions, again, about the integrity of America's beleaguered intelligence agencies. Having worked as an analyst at the National Security Agency, and had contacts with colleagues at the C.I.A., over the years, I can assure you that, in most cases, there is incredible pressure brought to bear on tailoring intelligence estimates to support White House policy initiatives. This was especially true during the Reagan years with regard to Nicaragua, and I suspect, with the current administration.

The people who make up the intelligence community are dedicated, hard-working and patriotic individuals who honestly believe in their mission and strive to make a difference. I find it sad that critics, and this White House, in particular, seek to discredit their efforts in order to mask incompetence, wrongheadedness and misdirected zeal. The most pernicious advocate of this form of scapegoating is the office of the vice president. Manuel Michalowski

Washington, Dec. 4, 2007

To the Editor:

Re ''Bush Insists Iran Remains a Threat Despite Arms Data'' (front page, Dec. 5): What's surprising about the response to this report is how eager people are to believe it. The same people who have discredited our intelligence on Iraq have, overnight, become ''believers'' in the same intelligence community.

One might conclude that the reason for this transformation from cynic to believer is the report's usefulness to critics of the Bush administration. Unfortunately, this report is also useful to those whose economic relationship with Iran is better served by turning a blind eye to its hostility toward the West.

Regardless of one's political affiliation, Americans, especially presidential candidates, should remain clear on who our enemies and friends really are. Iran is no friend of America. Andrea Economos

Scarsdale, N.Y., Dec. 5, 2007

To the Editor:

The National Intelligence Estimate on Iran's nuclear program is good news for the United States and the international community. It removes the urgency for using force against Iran. It gives diplomacy a chance to work, which could lead to a thaw of our relations with this critical Muslim nation.

But most important, it saves us from making another mistake like Iraq.

I remember sitting next to a top American envoy shortly after America's March 2003 invasion of Iraq. I asked him how the United States could justify that attack, since American troops failed to find weapons of mass destruction.

He could only reply, We will find them.

I am glad that this time we find out first before we again wage a war with incalculable financial and diplomatic consequences.

Vincent Wei-cheng Wang

Richmond, Va., Dec. 4, 2007

The writer is an associate professor and chairman of the department of political science, University of Richmond.

To the Editor:

Re ''Good and Bad News About Iran'' (editorial, Dec. 5):

With your call for ''intensified pressures,'' you seem to join President Bush in spinning the National Intelligence Estimate's finding that Iran halted nuclear weapons work in 2003 into an argument for a continued hard line.

But the truly worrisome fact is not that Iran is developing nuclear skills that could be applied to a bomb; it is that many countries are.

Some, like India, Pakistan and Israel, have acquired nuclear arsenals and yet enjoy our support. The only long-term solution for nuclear proliferation is to lead a global effort to abolish nuclear weapons.

The United States cannot preach as long as it possesses the world's foremost nuclear arsenal, pursues nuclear bunker-busters, and threatens nuclear first use and attack on nonnuclear states. Nuclear abolition should be a top issue in the presidential campaign and a priority for a new administration.

David Keppel

Bloomington, Ind., Dec. 5, 2007

To the Editor:

In your editorial, you appropriately caution us not to be overly optimistic about a regime (Iran's) that has made a habit of misrepresenting facts about weapons programs and other issues.

You seem to omit a caution for us not to give credence to any warnings from President Bush or anyone in his administration based on seven years' history of costly and deadly lies. One hopes that Mr. Bush might ''salvage his credibility with the American people and America's allies'' (do we still have any?) by talking with rather than bombing the Iranians. After all, they both speak the same language of deception.